HARBOR BOARD.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 962, 7 August 1903, Page 3

HARBOR BOARD.

[THE OVERSEER’S REPORT.

An adjourned meeting of the Harbor Board was held yesterday afternoon, there being present: Messrs Townley (Chairman), Harding, Hepburn, Cooper, Sievwright, Matthewson, Clark, and Captain Tucker. The Chairman read the Overseer’s report presented at the previous meeting, and published in the Times. In regard to the skeleton plough, for cutting the soft papa, the Overseer said that he had obtained prices

locally, and that of Messrs Humphreys and Son’s, £9, being the lowest, he had ordered the plough. In reply to Mr Matthewson, the Overseer said that the plough could be made strong enough at that price. * In reply to Mr Cooper, tho Overseer said the John Townley would supply the motive power to work | the plough, when it was too rough to go outside. As to the'lrepairs to the dredge, the Chairman said that the Inspector of Machinery was here now, and would say, what repairs .were required. The Chairman said that the Waihi was to be put on the slip on Monday, by which time the Overseer said that the slip would be ready.

EXTENSION OF GROYNE. Mr Sievwright asked what the Overseer had to say in support of his advice not to proceed beyond the breakwater pier with the groyne. Mr McLeod said that he did not care to set his opinion against that of engineers, but ho had simply stated his opinion, as he wished, when I the work was completed, to he in the position to say that lie had I told them so. Mr Sievwright said that lie had no I hesitation in moving that that item of the Overseer’s report he ignored. At first he had thought there was something in it, but on reading a great amount of literature on the subject ire was quite convinced as to the engineering view. Members might not bo able to understand the scientific side of the subject, hut they could understand the commonsense one. .The engineers uniformly, agreed on the advisability of extending tho groyne beyond the breakwater. He went on to show that the idea was that the extended groyne .would break the waves, causing them to spread over a wider area, thus reducing the range. He moved- that the Overseer’s advice on that point be ignored.

The Chairman : “ That the plans be adhered to,” will cover it. I second that. ,Tlio Chairman went on to quote the opinions of Messrs C. Y. O’Connor, Napier Bell, and Mr King, all being strongly in favor of continuing the groyne beyond tlve main pier. Mr O’Connor had said that the underlying principle of his I whole advice was to get the project beyond the shelter of the existing pier—if it were within the shelter of that, he said, it would do no good at all. He had done all that lie could to get Mr O’Connor’s plan accepted, and later on to get them to follow Mr Bell’s, but had not been successful He believed that it could have been done at no greater cost than the work now being done. As to the range in the river, they had been told they must expect that —the trouble was that they had not been getting enough water in the river. The whole question of range had been threshed out when Mr Napier Bell was here. He had told them that there would be a gr6at wash when the groyne was extended, and that if they removed the stockyard boats in the river would not be able to lie comfortably alongside the wharves. His idea was, as the groyne was extended, it would throw the sand round the other pier. It might he, when the groyne was extended that a portion of the upper work could be removed to allow the water to spread more.

Mr Matthewson said Mr McLeod was to be thanked for giving him the benefit of his experience, but it was always dangerous to alter plans. They knew that the work would increase the range. ' The motion to adhere to the plan was agreed to, the Chairman saying that any, variation would require the Marine Department’s sanction. In the course of further remarks, Mp Matthewson said they must remember that an ounce of experience was worth a pound of theory. Mr Harding said to his mind the only serious question in connection With the work was whether it should be done by contract or day labor. He should like to know what the cost of the ‘up-to-date appliances Would be. Mr Hepburn :Mr King put it at £SOO. Mr Harding said he would like to give the point more consideration. Unless good reason could be shown, he was in favor of contract. The Work was all open, and it seemed mainly a question of supervision. It was pointed out that there had been a difference af £SOOO in the tenders received, and the Engineer has been prepared to carry, out the work by day labor. . Mr Sievweight asked whether Mr McLeod was nervous in carrying out

the work-by, day labor, that he wanted the system altered. Mr McLeod said that Mr King in his estimate, proposed,, he believed, to .use.' the Board’s machinery on hantfr'ih’at would he required for other :ttork, and for the sand pumping he’proposed to use the John Townley, which would be required at the time and could not he spared.. In reply, to Mr Matthewson, Mr McLeod said, that he had no hesitation in taking up the work, but it was on account of the machinery, mainly, that he had advised • contract ; it would be more difficult work than the earlier portion. The Chairman said they had all the plans and specifications on which tenders were called, and surely they,

could carry it out by day labor. Mr Cooper said a contractor would take the machinery into account just as well as the Board. Mr Harding said it seemed that Mr McLeod did not want the Board to purchase a lot of machinery that would be useless to the Board when the work was done. The Chairman said a contractor would have to pay for them. Mr Harding: He would only

charge interest. The Chairman : Yes, and the price too, and own the machinery at the end of the contract. Mr Sicvwright said he would have no hesitation in moving in favor of day labor if they had the supervision ; they could not class Mr McLeod as an expert. Mr Harding said that was just the part he was not afraid of. He felt confident that it would be carried out as well under Mr McLeod as if Sir John Coode or any engineer were here.

Mr Matthewson said that all the engineering work had been done. Mr Hepburn said that he bad always been against day labor. Even when the price of £12,000 was wanted, he had thought it would be cheaper to get the work done by contract. In reply to questions, it was stat-. cd that .the Board was to supply all the timber, which was on hand, while the contractors would find ironwork or . cement. Provision has been made against the useless cutting up of timber. Mr Clark said he had no hesitation in moving that they should call tenders. If the tenders were considered unreasonable they could reject them. Ho thought they should have accepted tho tenders previously. Though Mr King had given the estimate) of £ll,0C(O it did not follow that he could have carried it out. He had no question as to the ability of Mr i McLeod to carry out the work, but he be- , lieved in contract. Mr Matthewson ’seconded the motion, i They had Mr King’s plans and estimates. E The conditions had altered • since they had previously called for tonders. Thoy

had a big contractor now in the district— Mr Hepburn: He was the one in for £17,000, and said he was glad he did not Se Mr' Matthewson said he probably did not want it then, and might have a different opinion now. In any ease they would loss no time, as they could not start the work in midwinter. Mr Harding said that there would be the question oi obtaining tho machinery. Mr McLeod sad he considered the main thiDg would be clearing the sand. He - believed that Mr King intended to make uso of the John Townley’s pump. The Chairman said that was Mr King s intention ; he intended to make use of all the Board's machinery to do tho work as inexpensively as possible. They would not be always removing sand ; it could be done at intervals. In reply to Mr Clark the Ovorseer said a boiler like that at the slip would be required, but he was not prepared then to state the cost. It was pointed out that there was already a resolution on the books in favor of day labor. That was in 1901, and nothing had been done since except to get the timber.

Mr Clark said they had got the dredge John Townley at about £9OOO, and it seemed like putting a man to do a boy s work to have the dredge at the pumping. He asked the. Chairman how long it would take to clear tho sand. The Chairman said he could not answer that question precisely, but Mr King’s idea was to have it done for a short time each day ; the pump was powerful, and would not take long. He did not want to give an engineering opinion. Mr Clark said it seemed to him better if they could get tho necessary plant for a i couple of hundred pounds; it seemed more businesslike than to have an expensive plant at such work. Mr Sievwright said they all seemed to be in the dark, and had no one to advise them. Mr Clark said that he was sure Mr McLeod could advise them. Mr Harding: If you give him the time to supply the particulars. He will not give us such an estimate off-hand, but he might tell how often he thought the John Townley would be required at the work. Mr Matthewson: He can hardly say that. Mr McLeod said as far as he could see at present the requirements would be all the time the work was going on. Captain Tucker declared in favor oi contract. They would have other works in hand requiring their staff and material The work would cost the Board as mucfc in labor, they would have to provide the machinery, and would have to take al. risks. He doubted if the work could be done by the Board as cheaply as by con tract. They would know then what thej would havo to face, but did not knou what day labor would run them into. The only cost of calling tenders would be e little advertising, everything else had beer, prepared. The Chairman said they could rescind the resolution by a unanimous vote._ The discussion had rather been speculation as to whether they would let by a tender when received. If they decided to call for tenders they should do so with the intention of, accepting one, and not merely to obtain a price to work on. Captain Tucker objected to the construction that they did not intend to accept a tender ; it was under the condition of all tenders.

After some remarks as to whether it would bo well to take further time for con* sideration, the former resolution in favor of day labor was rescinded on the motion of the Chairman, seconded by Captain Tucker, so as to leave the ground open. . Then Mr. Clark’s motion in favor of contract was mentioned. Captain Tucker thought they should reserve the right to modify the extent of the contract. Mr Matthewson: Call for tenders for 400 ft, with the alternative of doing the other 40ft. Captain Tucker said he was aware of the engineering argument, but he was not satisfied with the extension beyond the breakwater pier unless they had a wavebreaking apron. Messrs Hepburn, Clark, and Sievwright thought they should have the whole plan or nothing. Captain Tucker: I know you will have a nice range to deal with. Mr Hepburn said they had a tremendous range at Napier, at the Iron Pot; and some argument ensued on this point. The motion in favor of contract was carried, Mr Cooper dissenting. It was agreed to give the same time for the completion of the contract as when tenders were previously called. It was resolved, on the motion of the Chairman, that the Works Committee, go into the specifications, the calling of tenders to be left until next meeting. AN ENGINEER.

Mr Cooper moved, in accordance with notice, that an Engineer at £450 a year be appointed. He had every faith in Mr McLeod aa a workman, but considered the responsibility too much on the Board. Mr McLeod would still be retained. He was afraid that if he talked for a year he would not alter the position.

Mr Sievwright seconded the motion. He was afraid, as shown by that meeting, they would be laying up trouble for themselves if they did not have ,an engineer. They could get a good practical man like Mr King for the money. They could not expect Mr McLeod to take the responsibility —it was the Board who must take that. Mr Clark wanted to know who had to take the responsibility but the Board. The Chairman said that an engineer tried to give the best results, and in Mr King’s case everything he had devised was coming out as he had said. Mr Matthewson said they were move in need of a good man to carry out details than of any engineer. Mr McLeod was eminently fitted for carrying out the details of work to be undertaken for the next two years, for which they had all plans and specifications. Mr Clark said his contention was to finish the works in hand, and then instead of getting a £450 a year man to get the best engineer in the colony to prepare plans and leave the details to the foreman. The Chairman said they .had had Mr O’Connor’s opinion, and Mr Napier Bell’s. He in turn tried to get Mr O’Connor’s scheme, and then Mr Bell’s carried out, but had not been successful. His name had been connected with the failure of the harbor works, but he could prove in black and white that it was not so. Continuing, he spoke in favor of an engineer. The motion was put, and lost, those for being Messrs Cooper, Sievwright, and the Chairman.

COMPENSATION. ' An application for compensation for the land taken for the leading lights came up, , and was referred to the Finance Committee to report on. } OFFICE ACCOMMODATION. Captain Tucker urged that the prosperity of the place demanded a better shanty than the Board now occupied. He pointed out that at least there should be a strong room for the books and papers. The building should, he thought, be built in brick. Mr Sievwright supported the proposal, and stated that a great many valuable documents had been lost through there being no proper place to store them in—they had been eaten up by rats. Mr Harding said they all supported the proposal. Mr Clark said they should have a strong room, but the office was quite good enough otherwise ; he would not be inclined to spend sixpence in that way. The Chairman suggested that a premium be offered for plans for a nice building not to exceed a certain sum. After discussion as to the price, it was agreed to offer £lO 10s for competitive designs for a brick building to cost about £SOO. THE SLIP. The question as to charge for the slip was considered. After discussion it was agreed to fix the charge temporarily at £ls for the first four days. At Mr Clark’s suggestion the Overseer was instructed to keep a note of the expenses entailed for future guidance.